| |
  
|
||||||||||
Delegate Revolt
Submitted by panama on Sun, 02/10/2008 - 22:55
What if all of the delegates who want to vote for Ron Paul in our ideal second round of a brokered convention just went ahead and voted for him right away in the first round? Sure, they would be "unfaithful" and they would get reprimanded, but so what? » |
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Yep..interesting
I think there are some awesome surprises around the corner. It is great that we will have so many delegates push the issues. And what they think is "moral" and stable.... An endless war? Hmm.
I believe if you are a
I believe if you are a committed delegate it wouldn't matter the first round. They would just auto-magically assign them to the candidate that won the Primary for that state. In addition I believe that you are subject to a $10,000 dollar fine from the GOP as it would violate their by-laws. However, I believe I remember seeing where that has never been enforced before.
They might get legally disqualified from further voting
I think? Either way, we want to be careful that they don't somehow disqualify themselves.
We are new. Come and check us out! Purpose of our site is to quickly bring newbies up to speed regarding Ron Paul.
Careful...and Educated
Hence my call to RP supporters to help me dig up the state-by-state GOP rule book facts on this issue.
I don't believe this to be a "legal" issue, so much as a "rules and regulations" issue (i.e., not against The Law, but may be against a state's GOP rules). As such, consequences probably wouldn't be dire for the delegate personally, but, we definitely don't want to do anything to put RP's campaign in jeopardy, especially once we make it to the convention.
As nice as it may be to get a pat on our backs for voting our conscience in the first round, thereby "saving the nation" from itself, it won't be so nice if that pat turns into a stiff kick from the convention process, resulting in lost delegates and their lost votes.
This entire discussion may quickly morph into a non-issue, if we find that repercussions would make the process untenable. But...we may just as likely find that such maneuvers are written into the state GOP playbook. Only one way to find out.
We've got homework to do, friends -- let's get to it.
hmm
bump
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
hmm
I like it, though then we would be put off as terrorists set on undermining the republicans.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
If you are a delegate, and
If you are a delegate, and you are a Ron Paul supporter, then you have absolutely NO doubt how any other Republican candidate got where he is in this process. No other candidate has any support of the voters. No workers sent their hard earned money in to support them. They all got the free publicity of the Old Media without having to earn it. They are just shills of the status quo. The electoral process is supposed to be about electing the PEOPLE'S candidate, NOT the media or the Powers That Be. No delegate should harbor any qualms whatsoever of voting their conscience and casting their vote to what they consider to be the best candidate to lead our country. You can't play dirty, using every trick in the book including voter fraud and media manipulation to further your candidate and then cry "foul" when he doesn't get the support that you are hoping for.
www.paulforronpaul.com
Excellent point! Nobody can
Excellent point! Nobody can cry "foul" if we play, and defeat the establishment, by their own rules. To suggest otherwise is amazingly defeatist.
Anyone know?
I wish we knew how many delegates won at this point are bound and how many are not.
Mathew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Panama, Look Here
This topic has a discussion going in another thread, started a few days ago.
WRellim speaks nobly, and is to be commended for such. I think those views are true and just and right on the money.
AND...I think it would be wise to investigate and determine without error just what, precisely, the ramifications would in fact be, state by state, for a delegate to pledge to RP on the first round when s/he is "officially bound" to vote for another candidate on the first round.
It may be that they are disqualified from returning as a delegate in future conventions. However, it may just as well be that they could be disqualified from voting as a delegate in subsequent rounds of this convention...and it may be that their initial vote would be thrown out, so the first vote might get tossed and the subsequent votes be unavailable to that delegate.
PLEASE hear me: I do not know if that is the case at all! It is pure conjecture! But that's my point: we don't yet have the information as to the consequences, and that data is vital to have before considering this idea any further.
As long as we are in the dark as to possible consequences, it would be rash to advise delegates to abandon their pledged votes to further RP in the first round, noble ideas notwithstanding.
So let's get ourselves educated. Let's get the rules for each state and find out what the actual result would be for voting one's conscience.
Thanks
Thanks for replying and pointing me to the other thread. I mostly just brought this up as an interesting/fun "What If...?". If you've read any of my other posts, you know I'm really quite pragmatic and very much a realist. I can hope and pray, but I don't think anyone here knows what will happen 100%. I wish we did!
Delegates are Representatives...
As I posted in previous replies to messages. Delegates are elected Representatives, and as such it is really their DUTY to vote their conscience.
It would be morally reprehensible for them to knowingly vote for someone who they sincerely believe was: a) mentally unstable, or b) intentionally opposed to the principles of the party itself.
Yes, I know the delegates are "bound by oath and affirmation" -- but you HAVE to understand the HISTORY to understand how and why that "binding" came about.
The PRIMARY reason for the "oath" and the "binding" was to prevent corruption and the literal BUYING of delegate votes (via money AND privileges, etc) -- and only incidentally to prevent them from voting their consciences.
Thanks for the interesting
Thanks for the interesting historical perspective. It would be nice to see them vote by their consciences always. Ah, Utopia... :)
But simply saying it was because of "conscience" does not
guarantee it was NOT somehow because of corruption (i.e. the presence of something new in your wallet changed your "conscience" for you).
You see the dilemma.
I think *this* year if someone were from say a "McCain" state and were to vote in a manner that differed from what they were "bound" to -- they probably COULD claim that their conscience would not allow them to vote for McCain; if simply because so many people, including PROMINENT Republicans have already made such statements in public arenas.
That does NOT mean that if only a few people did so they would not suffer some significant consequences, including possible legal civil consequences.
The worst of which would be the accusation that they made their "oath or affirmation" falsely -- i.e. they never had any intention of following the "binding" and voting for McCain and essentially "perjured" themselves by taking that oath. (But since the oath is NOT a matter of legal court record nor an actual crime, they would have difficulty proving it, as well as proving the underlying "intent" -- though certainly VERY active RP supporters such as myself would have so much evidence of our support of RP that defense would be difficult if not impossible).
If some RP supporters are pledged to McCain
or anyone else, then IMO they should not vote for Paul on the first ballot; that would leave the final result open to a legal challenge (and the losers would be sure to pursue it).
A better bet would be for those delegates to simply go missing - leave the convention site itself - during the first ballot.
-------------------
George Dance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Dance_(Ontario_politician)
-------------------
George Dance
Ron Paul Ames High in Iowa (by George Dance)
http://www.nolanchart.com/article8879_Ron_Paul_Ames_High_in_...
bad idea
If those people are missing during that first vote, they could potentially and immediately motion to change the rules of the process. They could pass things however they wanted without our input if that were to happen.
How many delegates do you think we will have?
It sounds like you think we will have a majority, or enough to deprive McCain of one. What are you basing this on?
if McShame has 1st-ballot "clinch" then...
....YES. Otherwise, waiting for 2nd-ballot STEALTH smells sweet-as-honey to ME....
See, what worries me is that
See, what worries me is that anything can happen in the second round. So we might as well "preemptively strike" and just go for it.
Though your brother's bound and gaged
And they've chained him to a Chair
Won't you please come to Chicago just to see
Not sure if you want a repeat of the '68 Chicago democrat convention in St. Paul. Not sure it would end well "post 911"
So you're saying that doing
So you're saying that doing something like this would cause a lot of people to be very upset and protest the convention?
Isn't that kind of what will happen anyway if RP does this ninja-style the way we want anyway? Hehe.
Doing so right now would be
Doing so right now would be too early. They will wait until the last minute, this way we can crush the opposition.
I'm proposing this
I'm proposing this hypothetical situation for the convention. Instead of dilly-dallying with multiple rounds of voting, just hit 'em with a knock-out punch in round one. :)
But what if they get thrown
But what if they get thrown out and disqualified. I'm just sayin'
Mathew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
I thought they could only be
I thought they could only be verbally reprimanded and kept out of it next time. But who cares?* They would have served their purpose, which would be to get our man in the White House.
* Don't mean to be insensitive to those who would be sacrificing themselves for the cause, I'm just saying... hypothetically. :)
I know
I hear ya!
F*ck the rules, they did.
Mathew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
>:D
Glad to see people taking this idea better than I expected. Haha!
But it's not going to happen this way... *sigh* :)